Budget 2017

Mary63 · 13-10-2016 3:08pm

The Childcare help is ridiculous.We now have the State contributing towards childcare but only for people who have babies in creches for over forty hours per week.

If you want part time childcare with a neighbour who isn't registered with Tusla because she only minds three children you won't get a cent.

The person who forgoes their income to be at home rearing their own baby gets nothing but their partners sole earning taxes are going to subsidise the costs of the two income family.

The payment should have followed the person caring for the child,if that person is the childs parent and is taking care of the child at home then this parent should be subsidised too.

Im not sure actually should the state be getting involved with the childcare bill at all,if you have one child you can probably afford quality childcare.Why should you go on to have two or three more children when you know you can't afford to take time out of the workplace to rear them and you know you can't afford the childcare.

The payment that goes to the childcare provider,i.e. the creche owner will be pocketed and the fees will go up.Same with the help for the first time buyer,the Builders will increase the price by 20,000 euros and laugh(harder)all the way to the bank.Why aren't we asking why are houses so expensive,seemingly it costs about 70,000 euros to build a house with direct labour but yet I saw new builds in Carrickmines selling for 650,000 euros on Saturday,where is all this money going.The houses were nothing special,just boxy rooms with poor kitchens and small gardens.

Why wasn't the help given to all first time buyers buying second hand properties,what was the reason for the discrimination.Why wasn't it limited to house price or was it,I missed that bit.

JustTheOne · 13-10-2016 3:10pm

DeadlyByDesign wrote: »

So for me I am having my first child in May next year (yay all planned and delighted). My partner and I are also in full time employment saving for our first house, trying to put 1k away between us every month. What is absolutely going to scupper us is child care/creche costs for when my wife goes back to work.

So the creches/childcare can cost anywhere upwards of 800k...per month in Dublin. So our 1k savings per month is going to be a tough ask (between the 2 of us we are on 80k) a year. As well as that our rent is €1250 p/m and we have the usual expenses of phone, tv, electricity, gas etc.

So I was hoping that the new subsidy would be a bit better with the budget. Basically it will work out at 900 euro a year which is about 20 quid a month.....wow thanks. So right now we are at a loss as to how to save for a deposit for a decent home. Don't get me wrong it can be done but I know I am going to have to sit my wife down and say we may have to aim for commuting distance as finding a decent house in Dublin at a decent price is crazy at the moment.

The only other option is to leave Ireland and go to Germany (where my wife is originally from), they have free child care and a decent renters market. Right now it may be a real option that we are putting on the table

Best off declaring yourself homeless.

Will get a house much quicker at a fraction of the cost.

I'm not even joking.

LegallyAbroad · 13-10-2016 3:12pm

Mary63 wrote: »

The Childcare help is ridiculous.We now have the State contributing towards childcare but only for people who have babies in creches for over forty hours per week.

If you want part time childcare with a neighbour who isn't registered with Tusla because she only minds three children you won't get a cent.

The person who forgoes their income to be at home rearing their own baby gets nothing but their partners sole earning taxes are going to subsidise the costs of the two income family.

The payment should have followed the person caring for the child,if that person is the childs parent and is taking care of the child at home then this parent should be subsidised too.

Im not sure actually should the state be getting involved with the childcare bill at all,if you have one child you can probably afford quality childcare.Why should you go on to have two or three more children when you know you can't afford to take time out of the workplace to rear them and you know you can't afford the childcare.

The payment that goes to the childcare provider,i.e. the creche owner will be pocketed and the fees will go up.Same with the help for the first time buyer,the Builders will increase the price by 20,000 euros and laugh(harder)all the way to the bank.Why aren't we asking why are houses so expensive,seemingly it costs about 70,000 euros to build a house with direct labour but yet I saw new builds in Carrickmines selling for 650,000 euros on Saturday,where is all this money going.The houses were nothing special,just boxy rooms with poor kitchens and small gardens.

Why wasn't the help given to all first time buyers buying second hand properties,what was the reason for the discrimination.Why wasn't it limited to house price or was it,I missed that bit.

It is limited by house price.

The reason it wasn't extended to second hand houses is that the aim of the policy to increase supply, not to increase house prices.

The reason that people who don't work and mind their kids from home don't get any childcare payments is that the State wants both parents working and paying taxes as it brings in more revenue and is more economically productive.

LegallyAbroad · 13-10-2016 3:12pm

JustTheOne wrote: »

Best off declaring yourself homeless.

Will get a house much quicker at a fraction of the cost.

I'm not even joking.

Will you actually, though, or will you just end up living in a hotel?

JustTheOne · 13-10-2016 3:13pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

Will you actually, though, or will you just end up living in a hotel?

You will have to for a while but you will get bumped up to the top of the list.

LegallyAbroad · 13-10-2016 3:14pm

JustTheOne wrote: »

You will have to for a while but you will get bumped up to the top of the list.

How long's "a while" and what's he meant to do in the interim?

techdiver · 13-10-2016 3:15pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

There's somewhere in between "cheap and easy" and "punitive".

How about "raising children is expensive and hard, but it has always been expensive and hard, since you're literally paying the costs for extra humans, but it would seem as if Ireland has done a decent job in molding society in such a fashion as to make having children attractive, given that Irish people have more children than anywhere else in Europe."

We have some of the worst child care provisions in europe. Just because we have a higher birthrate doesn't mean it is easier here than in other countries. Also, before anyone interjects and states that it is your own decision to have children, that no one forces you etc, I agree, but it doesn't get away from the fact that as a nation we need a higher birthrate to provide the taxpayers of the future.

I understood the costs etc, but I also, would take pause before having anymore children due to the costs. Childcare is actually only one part. The government need to recognise that in some instances, one parent would prefer to stay at home and raise the children. The taxation system should reflect this is a fairer way by allowing full joint assessment of couple from an income tax and credits point of view.

Knine · 13-10-2016 3:16pm

JustTheOne wrote: »

You will have to for a while but you will get bumped up to the top of the list.

No you won't, you could end up in the hotel for a long time.

JustTheOne · 13-10-2016 3:16pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

How long's "a while" and what's he meant to do in the interim?

Could be months could be a year.

JustTheOne · 13-10-2016 3:17pm

Knine wrote: »

No you won't, you could end up in the hotel for a long time.

Whoever screams the loudest.

Believe me I've seen it first hand.

LegallyAbroad · 13-10-2016 3:19pm

techdiver wrote: »

We have some of the worst child care provisions in europe. Just because we have a higher birthrate doesn't mean it is easier here than in other countries. Also, before anyone interjects and states that it is your own decision to have children, that no one forces you etc, I agree, but it doesn't get away from the fact that as a nation we need a higher birthrate to provide the taxpayers of the future.

I understood the costs etc, but I also, would take pause before having anymore children due to the costs. Childcare is actually only one part. The government need to recognise that in some instances, one parent would prefer to stay at home and raise the children. The taxation system should reflect this is a fairer way by allowing full joint assessment of couple from an income tax and credits point of view.

Thereby taking people out of the workforce, and less taxes to pay for pensions etc., for that to be a good policy, even in the long-term the people staying at home would have to have two extra babies on top of whatever children they were going to have anyway.

It's sound economic policy to have both parents working.

techdiver · 13-10-2016 3:19pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

It is limited by house price.

The reason it wasn't extended to second hand houses is that the aim of the policy to increase supply, not to increase house prices.

The reason that people who don't work and mind their kids from home don't get any childcare payments is that the State wants both parents working and paying taxes as it brings in more revenue and is more economically productive.

So now you admit that we have engineered a society where impediments are placed in the way of having children??

techdiver · 13-10-2016 3:21pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

Thereby taking people out of the workforce, and less taxes to pay for pensions etc., for that to be a good policy, even in the long-term the people staying at home would have to have two extra babies on top of whatever children they were going to have anyway.

It's sound economic policy to have both parents working.

You could approach it from another angle, by having more single income households, you free up jobs for zero income households, thus reducing the need for state welfare to households. It can swing both ways...

TheDoc · 13-10-2016 3:24pm

Knine wrote: »

No you won't, you could end up in the hotel for a long time.

While people on social housing lists are providing houses, that they reject for not having big enough gardens, locations and a raft of other stuff that is beggers belief is entertained

LegallyAbroad · 13-10-2016 3:24pm

techdiver wrote: »

You could approach it from another angle, by having more single income households, you free up jobs for zero income households, thus reducing the need for state welfare to households. It can swing both ways...

Not really. The zero income households won't have the education/skills to slip in to replace all the solicitors/doctors/nurses/teachers/accountants etc., etc. coming out of the workforce. Zero income households are heavily weighted towards those with limited education and skills.

myshirt · 13-10-2016 3:25pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

It's sound economic policy to have both parents working.

Not at all at all. Where did you get your economics degree?

The loss of women in the home has had a huge effect on modern economies and pushed up costs. Nabby pabby liberals and fifth wave 'feminism' has not helped either. In Dublin, you'll find it near on impossible to compete out there with a single income household. Even worse is the emergence of DINKS who really have distorted affairs.

Iseedeadpixels · 13-10-2016 3:26pm

JustTheOne wrote: »

Whoever screams the loudest.

Believe me I've seen it first hand.

This right here, happens all the time, I know of a girl who has 4 kids by 3 different fathers, went to the media and she got a place within weeks.....last kids father suddenly appears again and living with her in her new place.

techdiver · 13-10-2016 3:35pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

Not really. The zero income households won't have the education/skills to slip in to replace all the solicitors/doctors/nurses/teachers/accountants etc., etc. coming out of the workforce. Zero income households are heavily weighted towards those with limited education and skills.

Some, not all of these households could be educated and with skills, especially in recent years when the arse fell out from under many sectors of the economy.

Freeing up positions will reduce zero income households and each reduction is a double whammy from an exchequer point of view. Welfare recipient to tax contributor.

JustTheOne · 13-10-2016 3:35pm

Iseedeadpixels wrote: »

This right here, happens all the time, I know of a girl who has 4 kids by 3 different fathers, went to the media and she got a place within weeks.....last kids father suddenly appears again and living with her in her new place.

Its what's wrong with society.

We have given this idea that it's OK to have some kids and the government has to home you and support you financially.

We have the highest payments to able bodied unemployed people in the world.

It's unsustainable but does anyone dare ever suggest it?

Imagine having to listen to Mary lou and Paul Murphy.

We are a welfare state and have bred a generation who see it as the norm.

Mary63 · 13-10-2016 3:36pm

legallyabroad,how does giving twenty thousand to a young house buyer increase supply and how are we going to ensure builders don't just slap another twenty thousand onto house prices.

The only way to deal with house prices is to have an independent valuer certifying what a house is worth and making it illegal for banks to offer mortgages above this amount.We won't do this though because the Builders are a powerful lobby group and they are controlling the house prices.

We are now back to what happened before the boom,house prices and rents too high,suicide rates rising because people are up to their ears in debt,working very long days thus compromising their family time together.The divorce rates are rising because of the stress too and you have so many children spending their entire childhoods in creches with up to six staff changes in a year,we know this is very bad for children and yet the Government is now subsidising childcare but only for full time childcare.

We are storing up so many mental health problems in the future because an infants needs cannot be met in large creches with staff changing constantly.These poor children are gone from home in many cases for up to ten hours a day.They come home and go to bed.Who is nurturing them.

13-10-2016 4:43pm

First sign of house prices being jacked up, whether it is actually related to the 5% rebate or not...

http://www.thejournal.ie/budget-housing-3024449-Oct2016/

The director of the selling agency says it is normal for prices to change as the houses get snapped up, and that they are down to the last few builds available on the development.

Fair enough. I don't know enough about the regular practices (whether the last few houses in a new development get increased by up to 10% on the original price to reflect the demand/supply) to immediately call foul like the Journal and its commentators have. However, If this Budget measure was intended to help the first-time buyer as much as possible, and help as many of them as possible, why limit the rebate to new builds only?

Kal El · 13-10-2016 5:17pm

tigger123 wrote: »

It's an observation based on experience. And it was part of a wider discussion on 'why would you be bothered with a career'. It was just one reason I was putting forward.

I'm not following what you mean with the docile girl comment though. I don't see the comparison. An ambitious man is most appropriately compared to an ambitious woman.

Its irrelevant to his career. You put forward a cliche for what women like, I was just doing the same. Both are irrelevant

Mary63 · 13-10-2016 5:41pm

Zappone is now talking about measures to bring all childminders into the regulatory net.This won't happen because it suits the parent and childminder to deal in cash.The childminder doesn't have to declare the income so she can provide the service cheaper and pass on the discount to the parent.She can also fill the house with as many children as she wants even though she is supposed to register with Tusla if she is minding more than four children.In the real world this is how people on low incomes access childcare,Zappone doesn't live in the real world and she doesn't even have children.

There are so many women around the country who are at home for the sake of their own children.They are often asked to take other peoples children after school and they will do this is there is no red tape and no tax returns to be filled in.If they want to be part of the taxed workforce they will go out and get a proper paying job and not one where they work for five euros an hour minding other peoples children.

Wouldn't you think a Minister for Children should at least have a couple of blighters of her own.Its like parenting "experts' giving advice.I will only go to their talks if they have more than one child,if they have no children or just one child they can't possibly help me with my parenting problems.

awec · 13-10-2016 5:44pm

Mary63 wrote: »

Zappone is now talking about measures to bring all childminders into the regulatory net.This won't happen because it suits the parent and childminder to deal in cash.The childminder doesn't have to declare the income so she can provide the service cheaper and pass on the discount to the parent.She can also fill the house with as many children as she wants even though she is supposed to register with Tusla if she is minding more than four children.In the real world this is how people on low incomes access childcare,Zappone doesn't live in the real world and she doesn't even have children.

There are so many women around the country who are at home for the sake of their own children.They are often asked to take other peoples children after school and they will do this is there is no red tape and no tax returns to be filled in.If they want to be part of the taxed workforce they will go out and get a proper paying job and not one where they work for five euros an hour minding other peoples children.

Wouldn't you think a Minister for Children should at least have a couple of blighters of her own.Its like parenting "experts' giving advice.I will only go to their talks if they have more than one child,if they have no children or just one child they can't possibly help me with my parenting problems.

Hold on, you are criticising Zappone because her scheme is inconvenient for tax dodgers? :pac:

LegallyAbroad · 13-10-2016 5:48pm

myshirt wrote: »

Not at all at all. Where did you get your economics degree?

The loss of women in the home has had a huge effect on modern economies and pushed up costs. Nabby pabby liberals and fifth wave 'feminism' has not helped either. In Dublin, you'll find it near on impossible to compete out there with a single income household. Even worse is the emergence of DINKS who really have distorted affairs.

http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/economic-empowerment/facts-and-figures#notes

UN and OECD. Women in workforce greatly increases economic growth.

techdiver · 13-10-2016 6:00pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/economic-empowerment/facts-and-figures#notes

UN and OECD. Women in workforce greatly increases economic growth.

What is the point of this "economic growth" when all it achieves is driving the cost of living up at a disproportionate rate.

In years past a it was the norm that mortgages were affordable one a single income. Now that is the exception rather than the rule. We might have nominal growth, but the only effect of it is to also increase the cost of living to the point where we are not better off. In fact from a societal point of view we are worse off as our children are being raised by strangers and people only see their kids for a couple of hours in the evening and at weekends.

This adversely effects the children as well as the parents.

Mary63 · 13-10-2016 6:11pm

Im not condoning tax dodging but if you are only getting five euros an hour for minding children I can't see why you would bother with the red tape of declaring it and also opening your home to be subject to inspection by Tusla.

To make this worth your while you would probably want to get twenty euros an hour and that means the low paid worker isn't going to be able to go to work.

I know you can earn fifteen thousand a year before being liable for tax by childminding but for many people they just want to do it casually with a neighbour of friend and they don't want to have employer liabilities or have to do tax returns.Many of these childminders smoke(horror) and serve the mindees chicken nuggets everyday.They may also have dogs,cats etc in the food preparation area,all no,no to the Tusla people.Many of the childminders too may not have informed their household insurance people that they are childminding either and this is probably another box that has to be ticked.

All in all a very silly idea.It would have been much better to have increased the Child benefit and taxed it,this means all parents including those who want to be at home with their children can have the money to spend as they wish.Giving the money to the creche owners could mean that it will be grabbed with both hands and then prices increased anyway.

The creche staff are paid abysmally,they earn approx twenty thousand euross a year and often are let go for the summer.Does anyone actually look at where the high costs parents are paying is going.Surely the biggest cost of any business must be wages and if its up to two thousand a month to have two children minded full time and the staff are paid ten euros an hour there must be a lot of profit.

myshirt · 13-10-2016 7:24pm

LegallyAbroad wrote: »

http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/economic-empowerment/facts-and-figures#notes

UN and OECD. Women in workforce greatly increases economic growth.

So a bunch of feminists? That's where you got your information?

A complete falsity, and complete bullsh!t.

NetChat101 · 13-10-2016 8:42pm

To awec who posted earlier about childminders being tax dodgers - most childminders are minding only one or two children for low rates (I'm getting €3.30 per hour) - therefore I, and the majority of childminders like me, are not earning enough to pay tax. Why do people insist on overlooking this fact when the topic of childminders pay comes up??

We are so often portrayed as cute ones standing in our doorway every morning, rubbing our hands together gleefully at the thought of money stacking up in our bank accounts, as we herd our little cash cows through our doorway. Then we spend the day counting our massive wads of money earned illegally through dodging tax, while we lock our little mindees in the broom closet and don't look up nor down at them for the day!! Get real!!

For those people who continuously insist that childminders have it all sewn up - try doing the job for a month. It is a very responsible, sometimes tough but mostly rewarding job that not everyone would be willing to do. The hourly rate is very low for the vast majority of minders but in my case I am fine with that, as I am home with my own children. And again, I have so often seen posts from people saying "Sure it's money for nothing isn't she at home with her own kids anyway"!! Yes I am at home with my own kids but being at home with my own kids and being at home with my own kids together with kids I mind are two VERY different things. The dynamic is completely different, my kids are sharing their Mam, their house and their toys. Again, I'm not complaining about this, I chose to do it (after my whole family agreeing to it), and my children know that in order for me to be at home with them after school this is something I have to do to sustain that. I am also enabling the woman whose children I mind to be out in the workforce by offering low rates, flexibility, taking her children when they are sick, and not charging for any days off (hers or mine).

However, I'm sick of posts on numerous sites that portray me and others like me as shady, money grabbing characters who are dodging the law - 30% of parents must think we're doing something right, though, as they choose to have their children minded in a childminders home rather than in a different childcare setting.

foggy_lad · 13-10-2016 9:48pm

Mary63 wrote: »

Zappone is now talking about measures to bring all childminders into the regulatory net.This won't happen because it suits the parent and childminder to deal in cash.The childminder doesn't have to declare the income so she can provide the service cheaper and pass on the discount to the parent.She can also fill the house with as many children as she wants even though she is supposed to register with Tusla if she is minding more than four children.In the real world this is how people on low incomes access childcare,Zappone doesn't live in the real world and she doesn't even have children.

There are so many women around the country who are at home for the sake of their own children.They are often asked to take other peoples children after school and they will do this is there is no red tape and no tax returns to be filled in.If they want to be part of the taxed workforce they will go out and get a proper paying job and not one where they work for five euros an hour minding other peoples children.

Wouldn't you think a Minister for Children should at least have a couple of blighters of her own.Its like parenting "experts' giving advice.I will only go to their talks if they have more than one child,if they have no children or just one child they can't possibly help me with my parenting problems.

Many of these "part time" child minders are also on social welfare payments so can't register or declare any income or they will lose their benefits, they make a little extra by minding a child whose parent is working part time and only charging about half the crèche rates. many people would not be able to go back to work because of the cost of childcare if not for these women.

Budget 2017

Comments