Budget Day - The Official After Hours Thread - (Ireland's undisputed Voice of Reason)

can_of_soup wrote: »

whenever you finish up dealing in slogans

you might consider the fact that all pension funds have a sizeable percentage of bonds in them , it wasn't only roman abramovich who had his investment saved , plenty of regular pensioners in Ireland also did

You forgot Noonan and many other FG politicians in that.

can_of_soup

tayto lover wrote: »

How do you know that they all have savings etc?

savings , disposable income , whatever you like

if a seventy year old couple were earning 60 k per year between them yesterday and still in receipt of a medical card , they had plenty of spare cash

can_of_soup

tayto lover wrote: »

You forgot Noonan and many other FG politicians in that.

you know this do you , you appear to enjoy personalising things

The_Gatsby

TheDoc wrote: »

Stupid move by the government if it comes to pass, which will only increase revenue for the black market, and reduce revenue for the exchequer.

Well not really. If you can realise this then so can the gorvernment. They always increase the tax on cigarettes in the budget. I'm sure if they were actually losing revenue then they wouldn't do it. They're stupid, but not that stupid.

can_of_soup wrote: »

savings , disposable income , whatever you like

if a seventy year old couple were earning 60 k per year between them yesterday and still in receipt of a medical card , they had plenty of spare cash

Post No.2 ??
Daddy in FG is he?
Must defend the party.

Foxtrol

tayto lover wrote: »

No they should be allowed to see out their final years in peace.
They have paid already.
Realistic is in the eye of the beholder.
All this is to pay for the sins of rich bondholders anyway. Friends of the Govt.

Forget ‘realistic’ then, ‘sustainable levels of welfare payments’ is a much more accurate way to describe it. There is no more money so some part of welfare had to take a hit, better those who have given the least during the recession so far than others who have been hit time and again.

Really think the government would have been better making a direct cut to the pensions than trying to slyly slide in the cut to phone allowance. Much easier to win a PR argument saying look there’s been a 9.50 cut to pensions but they’re still X above rates pre boom and they also have all these other payments (phone, heating, medical card etc) than what they’re going to have to deal with now - the image that will be portrayed of poor Biddy in the middle of nowhere with no phone.

tayto lover wrote: »

Post No.2 ??
Daddy in FG is he?
Must defend the party.

In fairness it's pretty bad when people with no mortgages and a very decent pension are being subsidized by people struggling with negative equity, children, health insurance etc.

Actually it's a perverse redistribution of wealth from the hard up to the comfortable.

Foxtrol wrote: »

Forget ‘realistic’ then, ‘sustainable levels of welfare payments’ is a much more accurate way to describe it. There is no more money so some part of welfare had to take a hit, better those who have given the least during the recession so far than others who have been hit time and again.

Really think the government would have been better making a direct cut to the pensions than trying to slyly slide in the cut to phone allowance. Much easier to win a PR argument saying look there’s been a 9.50 cut to pensions but they’re still X above rates pre boom and they also have all these other payments (phone, heating, medical card etc) than what they’re going to have to deal with now - the image that will be portrayed of poor Biddy in the middle of nowhere with no phone.

These people were hit big-time when working during their lives. As I said they paid 58% tax on occasions to keep the country going.
We would have saved as much by only giving Free Legal Aid to those found "not guilty" and making the guilty pay from their dole or wages. Would probably have cut crime rates too.

Charlie Rock wrote: »

In fairness it's pretty bad when people with no mortgages and a very decent pension are being subsidized by people struggling with negative equity, children, health insurance etc.

Actually it's a perverse redistribution of wealth from the hard up to the comfortable.

The get 230 euro per week and a few perks. The older people need more heat and medication in general.
Many do not use the free travel.
Not that comfortable in truth.

tayto lover wrote: »

The get 230 euro per week and a few perks. The older people need more heat and medication in general.
Many do not use the free travel.
Not that comfortable in truth.

That's people on the state pension. I'm talking about the qualification rates for full-entitlement medical cards being lowered for people on pretty good pensions.

Charlie Rock wrote: »

That's people on the state pension. I'm talking about the qualification rates for full-entitlement medical cards being lowered for people on pretty good pensions.

I would still treat them in the same fashion.

Cody Pomeray

tayto lover wrote: »

Not that comfortable in truth.

There's quite a serious gap between "not that comfortable in truth" aka €230 per week and "how long until I have to eat again?" aka €100 per week.

I don't think €230 per week is scandalously generous by the way. I am proud that we as a society care about the dignity of the elderly. Nevertheless, what is scandalous, is a shameless targeting of young people's personal well-being because, lets face it, many of them are more likely to emigrate than be at home for the next election.

There's a fundamental unwillingness to face up to the values of the community. Or at least, what I hope the values of the community would be. Because if Irish fiscal and banking policy represents the values of our community, we're all fcuked!

Foxtrol

tayto lover wrote: »

These people were hit big-time when working during their lives. As I said they paid 58% tax on occasions to keep the country going.
We would have saved as much by only giving Free Legal Aid to those found "not guilty" and making the guilty pay from their dole or wages. Would probably have cut crime rates too.

So if it’s such a small amount then what’s your issue, they're still doing massively better than pre-boom times? I sense you just want something to be outraged by.

Yes, giving those found guilty of crimes less money could have no unintended consequences like giving them more reason to go out and commit more crimes on their release?? :rolleyes:

tayto lover wrote: »

I would still treat them in the same fashion.

So a pensioned couple on over €900 per week, with no mortgage and no children, should be entitled to a medical card while young families struggle?

What you mean is you're okay with putting your hand in the pocket of people who're struggling and giving it to people who're not.

Foxtrol wrote: »

So if it’s such a small amount then what’s your issue, they're still doing massively better than pre-boom times? I sense you just want something to be outraged by.

Yes, giving those found guilty of crimes less money could have no unintended consequences like giving them more reason to go out and commit more crimes on their release?? :rolleyes:

I would be of the opinion that its a deterrent actually :rolleyes:
As for me "wanting" to be outraged do you think that our great Governments over the last number of years might have something to do with it?

[Deleted User]

Charlie Rock wrote: »

So a pensioned couple on over €900 per week, with no mortgage and no children, should be entitled to a medical card while young families struggle?

What you mean is you're okay with putting your hand in the pocket of people who're struggling and giving it to people who're not.

After working for 40+ years, perhaps they deserve to live out their days not having to worry about being able to afford the heating and being too scared to visit a doctor, something that becomes a regular event as you get older.

Idbatterim

I think your opinion on what these people should pay is going to be vastly different to mine. I don't think they should have to prop up social welfare for dozens of people because they've made a success of themselves.

Not even sure Bono lives here enough to pay tax here but we can swap him for any other high earner.

Nail on the head, sick of hearing how the "high earners" who are paying through the nose and far more than their fair share, should keep on stumping up for others... Pity they didnt cut another few hundred million from welfare and reduce it income tax to send out a clear message, from now on its going to pay to work here!

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience

Charlie Rock wrote: »

So a pensioned couple on over €900 per week, with no mortgage and no children, should be entitled to a medical card while young families struggle?

What you mean is you're okay with putting your hand in the pocket of people who're struggling and giving it to people who're not.

No I don't mean that at all as well you know.
Its the Govt's unwillingness to hit the people at the top who can well afford to pay a bit more. They chose to attack the young and the old instead.

tayto lover wrote: »

No I don't mean that at all as well you know.
Its the Govt's unwillingness to hit the people at the top who can well afford to pay a bit more. They chose to attack the young and the old instead.

You mean the top 10 per cent of Irish earners who are already paying 60 per cent of our income tax intake?

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Deleted User wrote: »

After working for 40+ years, perhaps they deserve to live out their days not having to worry about being able to afford the heating and being too scared to visit a doctor, something that becomes a regular event as you get older.

On €900+ a week what the hell would they be worrying about?
Time the rich were treated the same as the rest, being rich and old is no excuse for being pandered to!

tayto lover wrote: »

No I don't mean that at all as well you know.
Its the Govt's unwillingness to hit the people at the top who can well afford to pay a bit more. They chose to attack the young and the old instead.

That just totally dodges the point.

Plenty of the old have no need for a medical card - they get protected because they are the old and everyone likes a good whinge about taking anything off pensioners.

If they can afford to pay for it (of which many undoubtedly can) then why on earth should they get it for free?

Deleted User wrote: »

worry about being able to afford the heating and being too scared to visit a doctor

For a couple of seniors on €900 per week with no children and no mortgage?

Stop with the 'helpless, fragile, old dears' act -we're talking about well-off seniors here.

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience wrote: »

You mean the top 10 per cent of Irish earners who are already paying 60 per cent of our income tax intake?

They can well afford it. Didn't the pensioners you want to hit pay more pay 58% in their time?

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

On €900+ a week what the hell would they be worrying about?
Time the rich were treated the same as the rest, being rich and old is no excuse for being pandered to!

Sounds good, can we get rid of the 40% tax bracket then and tax "the rich" the same as everyone else at a nice 20%?

Perhaps meet half way, and have a flat rate 30% tax rate?

tayto lover wrote: »

They can well afford it. Didn't the pensioners you want to hit pay more pay 58% in their time?

Pensioners have had it very easy these last 4 years in comparison to the rest of the population

These measures are hardly crippling too

ElizaT33

As long as it is means tested on the elderly to ENSURE they do not need the medical card and either have health insurance and/or the means to pay for their medical treatment, then ok. But AS LONG as that is the case, which it most likely won't be.

I think this a very CLEVER Budget - placating the majority, yet making some sneaky cuts on the most vulnerable of society. Not impressed

I'm sick of hearing this "most vulnerable" crap too.

As if upon retirement you suddenly become vulnerable and haven't got a penny to your name.

Emotive nonsense. This is taking free healthcare off of people who can afford to pay for it so that we can continue to provide it to those who actually need it and who are actually vulnerable.

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience

awec wrote: »

Sounds good, can we get rid of the 40% tax bracket then and tax "the rich" the same as everyone else at a nice 20%?

That would be nothing short of class war. The reason that the tax rate rises on incomes is because the wealthier people get the better able they are to avoid tax, bury wealth in assets, become non-domicile, employ destructive accountants etc.

I'm not talking about the squeezed middle here before any one says it.

I love the way "means tested" is trotted out as if it's some sort of fix all

The logistics of doing it effectively are next to impossible