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

Pensioners and Intelligence

24

Comments

  • #32
    Einhard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭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.


  • #33
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #34
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    Einhard wrote: »
    But the elderly are not disadvantaged as a group!
    Something we as a nation should be proud of.


  • #35
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #36
    Einhard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭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?


  • #38
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,272 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #39
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #40
    Curly Judge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭Curly Judge


    Sand Wedge wrote: »
    No, it is not true.

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


  • #41
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    conor1979
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 197 ✭✭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.


  • #43
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭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.


  • #44
    Einhard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭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.


  • #45
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭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.


  • #46
    Curly Judge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭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.


  • #47
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #48
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭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....


  • #49
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    Exactly, tax the rich.
    That's what's happening.


  • #50
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭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.


  • #51
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    Einhard wrote: »
    They generally have comfortable lifestyles, with hugely generous entitlements.

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


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    Einhard wrote: »
    It boils down to this: we have to cut the national deficit.

    Agreed. But let's start with the dole cheats, the disability/invalidity cheats, the scam merchants, the bloated PS wage bill. Then we can look at the Pensioners.


  • #53
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    If there are ones who can afford to pay tax then so be it.

    That's what most people are arguing for.
    But what about the ones on the breadline?

    They would be hit least proportionately if they started means testing medical cards and eligibility for free travel and other (stupid) auto-qualified, by age rather than need, entitlements.


  • #54
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    later10 wrote: »
    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.
    Because the elderly no longer live in the shameful poverty I witnessed when I was younger.
    As society changed over the 20th century, things moved from people having big families to keep them in their old age and went from large families being an asset to large families being a liability.
    The state then took on the responsibility with an OAP but, as with all such societal changes, it took time to balance and bring the pension up to a decent standard, consequently many elderly suffered extreme poverty and even died as a result.
    I am proud this is no longer the case, because as a country we now look after our elderly and we also do it better than some others I could mention.


  • #55
    trishasaffron
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 922 ✭✭✭trishasaffron


    There's a huge difference between a pensioner in late 60's and whole of their health and a widow of 90+ with dementia (my Mum). Mind you I tried to understand her Revenue letter and I couldn't and I'm half her age.

    Also should say that in our case Revenue were very aware of her Social Welfare pension because I told them myself - it may be that they miscaculated the tax but I can't figure that out at all from the correspondence.

    In my experience for those over (say) 85 the issue is one of understanding. We should think about having a simplified taxation system - its so complex its really hard to be compliant.


  • #56
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,387 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    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.

    I'm sure they paid towards your Childrens Allowance and free education and paid Income Tax all their lives while working which supported many people who begrudge them their pension now.
    If they didn't pay enough tax i'm sure it will be sorted out for them by the taxman without burning them completely.


  • #57
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭later12


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    Because the elderly no longer live in the shameful poverty I witnessed when I was younger.
    But my point is you're only focusing on the end, and neglecting the means. This does a dis-service tho those of the elderly who remain in or close to poverty, and to the principle of a more equal society for the elderly.

    Yes, the universal tide of welfare transfers has lifted all boats by a certain amount across the board. But because of its universal nature, and therefore the resources of which it deprived (and deprives) the most vulnerable, it's more like a process one ought to regret than of which one can feel proud.

    Ignoring the process which achieves only a little for the least well off, and being proud of the end result regardless of what might be instead, is a very hollow level of pride.


  • #58
    Posy
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 27,907 Mod ✭✭✭✭Posy


    gigino wrote: »
    The old age pension is double here what it is north of the border.
    The cost of living down here is a lot more than up north, though.


  • #59
    Einhard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    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.

    Right...so we stop paying the increments to the Ps, saving €300 million. Where do we get the remaining 19 odd billion? Plant a money tree?
    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?

    Look...just because one is aged over 65 doesn't make one vulnerable. Why don't people get this? Also, the non-contributory state pension is c.€220 per week. I don't know where you buy your bread, but it must be pretty spectacular crust of that constitutes the bread line. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that people are far too sentimental about the elderly.
    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.

    Yes, and if we continue to pay these massively generous entitlements to current pensioners, than all othe rgenerations will be paying for it through their taxes, and huge reuctions in their entitlements.


  • #60
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    Einhard wrote: »
    Right...so we stop paying the increments to the Ps, saving €300 million. Where do we get the remaining 19 odd billion? Plant a money tree?
    The old saying "look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves" comes to mind. That is a third of one billion. A good and valid starting point. And if it's a choice between overpaid civil servants and pensioners, well the pensioners get my vote. Every time.
    Einhard wrote: »
    Look...just because one is aged over 65 doesn't make one vulnerable. Why don't people get this? Also, the non-contributory state pension is c.€220 per week. I don't know where you buy your bread, but it must be pretty spectacular crust of that constitutes the bread line. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that people are far too sentimental about the elderly.

    So you would think it easy to live on €30 approx. per day? Mind if I ask what your take home is weekly?
    Einhard wrote: »
    Yes, and if we continue to pay these massively generous entitlements to current pensioners, than all othe rgenerations will be paying for it through their taxes, and huge reuctions in their entitlements.

    You mention that your gran lives with you and she only hands up €40. That is a decision taken (and accepted) by your parents. Not all pensioners have that luxury.

    As I already said, I have no problem with targetting pensioners. as long as all the other aforementioned hangers-on are dealt with first.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    They would be hit least proportionately if they started means testing medical cards and eligibility for free travel and other (stupid) auto-qualified, by age rather than need, entitlements.

    I would agree, in general, with that principle. But looking at what's gone on in this country, it would appear that the pensioners are being viewed as soft targets. And that is morally wrong.


Advertisement