Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

FG on Child Benefit (Subsidy for sex)

  • 25-05-2021 6:41pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 340 ✭✭ Zookey123


    David McManus recently on the radio claimed that child benefit should be means tested. He also made a subsidy for sex comment which I assume was just to grab peoples attention. I actually do agree with a lot he had to say. I personally don't even understand why parents get massive tax credits for having kids. Surely as a family with children your using more of the country's resources than a single individual hence you should actually pay more tax. Why should the rest of us pay for their kids? Having a child in the modern world is a choice. If you cant afford it don't have kids.


«13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 33,882 ✭✭✭✭ Annasopra


    Zookey123 wrote: »
    David McManus recently on the radio claimed that child benefit should be means tested. He also made a subsidy for sex comment which I assume was just to grab peoples attention. I actually do agree with a lot he had to say. I personally don't even understand why parents get massive tax credits for having kids. Surely as a family with children your using more of the country's resources than a single individual hence you should actually pay more tax. Why should the rest of us pay for their kids? Having a child in the modern world is a choice. If you cant afford it don't have kids.

    You think Child Benefit is a subsidy to have sex?

    Apparently a "normal" woman is a busty blonde sexy page 3 model who wears make-up, short skirts and red lipsticks and has pouty lips.  Who knew. 👀😏

    ******

    "Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common"



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,281 ✭✭✭✭ Gatling


    Imagine complaining about people who can actually afford to have children,


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭ suicide_circus


    David McManus - Sex Subsidy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,773 ✭✭✭ LorenzoB


    OP, how do you suppose your pension will be paid if there's no young people to pay taxes?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,367 ✭✭✭✭ Maryanne84


    Zookey123 wrote: »
    David McManus recently on the radio claimed that child benefit should be means tested. He also made a subsidy for sex comment which I assume was just to grab peoples attention. I actually do agree with a lot he had to say. I personally don't even understand why parents get massive tax credits for having kids. Surely as a family with children your using more of the country's resources than a single individual hence you should actually pay more tax. Why should the rest of us pay for their kids? Having a child in the modern world is a choice. If you cant afford it don't have kids.

    Cos those kids will one day be paying your pension.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭ Antares35


    Zookey123 wrote: »
    David McManus recently on the radio claimed that child benefit should be means tested. He also made a subsidy for sex comment which I assume was just to grab peoples attention. I actually do agree with a lot he had to say. I personally don't even understand why parents get massive tax credits for having kids. Surely as a family with children your using more of the country's resources than a single individual hence you should actually pay more tax. Why should the rest of us pay for their kids? Having a child in the modern world is a choice. If you cant afford it don't have kids.

    Everybody who pays tax pays for things/ services they don't benefit from.


  • Registered Users Posts: 101 ✭✭ ElektroToad


    I'd agree with means testing but I'd flip it on its head..

    I'd encourage people with solid job history and paid their PAYE for over 4-5 years etc with increased child benefit. I've seen so many young hard working professionals having to put of having kids because they know the costs of childcare are so damn expensive here.

    Life-long dolers who never worked a day in their lives? Nah, no child benefits for you. You haven't contributed to the State, and therefore it's statistically more likely you'll raise kids that will also not work nor contribute to society via taxes.


    Unpopular opinion I know. That's why I'm not a politican :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,289 ✭✭✭✭ Mad_maxx


    Cap child benefit at fourth child


  • Registered Users Posts: 939 ✭✭✭ Badly fukt


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    Cap child benefit at fourth child

    Yep, this!




  • Loads more immigrants or Irish people having more kids. Take your pick.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    I'm hardly a fan of increasing social welfare spending, but unless we want pension and demographic collapse it's in our interest to keep having children.

    Unless this whole automation/AI thing ever takes off, then we might be alright.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,225 ✭✭✭ Airyfairy12


    The government is slowly but surely forcing a huge percentage of the population under 40 into poverty!
    Theyd made it impossible for single people earning under 50k a year to own their own home.
    Rents have increased massively
    The pension age has increased and will continue to do so.
    Theyve increased the number of years of tax contributions to avail of full state pension to 40 years (open to correction if I have my facts wrong with that number but thats my understanding) - Most young people dont leave education until 25 and often struggle to get consistent work, paid work or any work at all.
    Wages for people entering most professions in the last 10 years have been permanently cut or stagnated.
    Living costs in general have increased such as fuel, public services and insurance.
    Now they want to means test child benefit and take that from people too. Young working people are already putting off having kids/deciding against it because they cant afford it.

    In 50 years we are going to have an aging population struggling with homelessness and poverty beyond what this country has seen since the days of tenements. Its actually terrifying what's happening to this country.


  • Registered Users Posts: 939 ✭✭✭ Badly fukt


    I'm hardly a fan of increasing social welfare spending, but unless we want pension and demographic collapse it's in our interest to keep having children.

    Unless this whole automation/AI thing ever takes off, then we might be alright.

    No harm having children if you can provide and house them


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭ brainboru1104


    Badly fukt wrote: »
    No harm having children if you can provide and house them

    Yeah, I agree. Maybe it should be an income tax benefit instead of straight cash.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7 Bombastic93


    Zookey123 wrote: »
    I personally don't even understand why parents get massive tax credits for having kids.
    There's no tax credit for having kids though?
    Child benefit is not a tax credit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 243 ✭✭ Jerry Attrick


    Zookey123 wrote: »

    I personally don't even understand why parents get massive tax credits for having kids.

    Do they? Where can I apply?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭ Shebean


    If you want to be part of a society with street lights, bin collections, policing and laws you need pay the piper. We can't and shouldn't be allowed pick and choose, 'why should I pay toward cancer research, I don't have cancer. Why should I pay for school breakfast programs I've plenty of Frosties in the press' and so on. I'd rather not be stepping over homeless people or starving children on my way to work.

    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    Cap child benefit at fourth child

    I'd even say at two. Then they can have as many as they like, just no more money.


  • Registered Users Posts: 340 ✭✭ Zookey123


    LorenzoB wrote: »
    OP, how do you suppose your pension will be paid if there's no young people to pay taxes?

    Have kids if you can afford them. I am not saying a blanket ban on having children. If we keep incentivising people on welfare having kids via benefits more children will be brought up in poverty which isn't fair on them either.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,640 ✭✭✭✭ meeeeh


    Badly fukt wrote: »
    No harm having children if you can provide and house them

    And what do we do with ones who are born to families who can't support them? Cull them? Anyway the whole social system is based on fresh supply of new workers so it is in states interest that there is good birth rate and that they grow up into functional adults.

    It's some moron looking for attention and Regina Doherty already dismissed this nonsense. Unless he wants to punish people who work It's a daft idea.


  • Registered Users Posts: 939 ✭✭✭ Badly fukt


    meeeeh wrote: »
    And what do we do with ones who are born to families who can't support them? Cull them? Anyway the whole social system is based on fresh supply of new workers so it is in states interest that there is good birth rate and that they grow up into functional adults.

    It's some moron looking for attention and Regina Doherty already dismissed this nonsense. Unless he wants to punish people who work It's a daft idea.

    No, we should encourage people to have as many children as they can afford to house and rear, not give them subsidies to have as many as they want!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,640 ✭✭✭✭ meeeeh


    Badly fukt wrote: »
    No, we should encourage people to have as many children as they can afford to house and rear, not give them subsidies to have as many as they want!

    If you think 130 Euro of a benefit covers monthly cost of another sprog you are deluded. I'm not some left wing do gooder but keeping kids squalor will only cost state more because they will grow up in dysfunctional adults. Not to mention that councillor's ideas would affect middle class who are more likely to produce next generation of functioning adults. So there is absolutely no logic in your ranting.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    Cap child benefit at fourth child

    I would roll it back out back to be honest. I think after 2 you should be in your own.

    I have 3 but as said, my choice


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,399 ✭✭✭✭ ThunbergsAreGo


    I'm hardly a fan of increasing social welfare spending, but unless we want pension and demographic collapse it's in our interest to keep having children.

    Unless this whole automation/AI thing ever takes off, then we might be alright.

    Only if those kids grow up with good value and become productive members of society


  • Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭ Murph85


    I'm hardly a fan of increasing social welfare spending, but unless we want pension and demographic collapse it's in our interest to keep having children.

    Unless this whole automation/AI thing ever takes off, then we might be alright.

    Not those children. Maternity cost, child benefit, education , legal system, free legal aid, the amount of them with " disability " they arefree housing, they are colossal drains on the state


  • Registered Users Posts: 41,355 ✭✭✭✭ SEPT 23 1989


    If you are able to save the childrens allowance you shouldn’t be getting it


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,882 ✭✭✭✭ Annasopra


    Zookey123 wrote: »
    Have kids if you can afford them. I am not saying a blanket ban on having children. If we keep incentivising people on welfare having kids via benefits more children will be brought up in poverty which isn't fair on them either.

    If you dont pay child benefit then more children will be brought up in poverty which isn't fair on them either

    Apparently a "normal" woman is a busty blonde sexy page 3 model who wears make-up, short skirts and red lipsticks and has pouty lips.  Who knew. 👀😏

    ******

    "Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common"



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,882 ✭✭✭✭ Annasopra


    Badly fukt wrote: »
    No, we should encourage people to have as many children as they can afford to house and rear, not give them subsidies to have as many as they want!

    Its not a subsidy to have children. Its a social support for the children.

    Apparently a "normal" woman is a busty blonde sexy page 3 model who wears make-up, short skirts and red lipsticks and has pouty lips.  Who knew. 👀😏

    ******

    "Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common"



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,882 ✭✭✭✭ Annasopra


    Murph85 wrote: »
    Not those children. Maternity cost, child benefit, education , legal system, free legal aid, the amount of them with " disability " they arefree housing, they are colossal drains on the state

    Yeah lets cull the entire population cause they are a colossal drain on the state

    Apparently a "normal" woman is a busty blonde sexy page 3 model who wears make-up, short skirts and red lipsticks and has pouty lips.  Who knew. 👀😏

    ******

    "Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common"



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,281 ✭✭✭✭ Gatling


    If you are able to save the childrens allowance you shouldn’t be getting it

    The same can be applied to those who use it for smokes and cider


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭ Antares35


    Murph85 wrote: »
    Not those children. Maternity cost, child benefit, education , legal system, free legal aid, the amount of them with " disability " they arefree housing, they are colossal drains on the state

    What's wrong with having maternity costs covered? I've gone public on both of my babies. Our maternity healthcare system is fantastic. I don't feel an iota of guilt availing of something I've probably paid for twice over already in my working life through taxation :) other people avail of services I don't and so on. That's how the system works. We don't get to pick and choose what we want to support.


Advertisement