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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Thats just wrong

2»

Comments

  • #52
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    HensVassal wrote: »
    Homesexual sex is an act of lust or love.

    Anal rape is an act of violence. And anal sex is not necessarily a homosexual act.
    Your posts in this thread are the type of posts that are sucking the life out of boards!


  • #53
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    HensVassal wrote: »
    Homesexual sex is an act of lust or love.

    Anal rape is an act of violence. And anal sex is not necessarily a homosexual act.

    lolwtf.

    How did the conversation turn to this


  • #54
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    smash wrote: »
    Not a hope in hell.

    If they have their mortgage paid and don't have many outgoings? I think it would be an ok standard.


  • #55
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    If they have their mortgage paid and don't have many outgoings? I think it would be an ok standard.
    No way. After paying for food and petrol and everything else you'd have nothing. It could take months to save even to buy a flight for a holiday never mind accommodation and spending money.


  • #56
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    smash wrote: »
    No way. After paying for food and petrol and everything else you'd have nothing. It could take months to save even to buy a flight for a holiday never mind accommodation and spending money.

    My parents live on the state pension. They also go on holidays.

    Edit: should say, its contributory, I don't know if that makes a difference to the amount they get.


  • #57
    Agent Smyth
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Agent Smyth


    smash wrote: »
    No way. After paying for food and petrol and everything else you'd have nothing. It could take months to save even to buy a flight for a holiday never mind accommodation and spending money.

    At the moment myself and my wife live on >20k a year, that includes all living expenses, med insurance, two cars, and any social & hobby expenditure, the only thing that's not included is foreign holidays.


  • #58
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    smash wrote: »
    Not a hope in hell.

    Tens of thousands of people live perfectly well on the State Pension.

    233 pw = 12k approx pa.


  • #59
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    Sad fact of life. You earn money and have half taken off you. Whatever you spend is 21% VAT. Whatever you save, the tiny bit of interest is taken away again with DIRT. Buy a car, get shafted twice, buy a house, ditto, finally when you're old and need care, you will have to fork out €3k a month to be left lying in your own filth in a crooked nursing home and if you really did, against all odds and the state robbing you blind, manage to retain a house and a few bob, the state will shaft you even in death.
    Oh, and pensions are a sham. A glorified pyramid scheme. You pay in now to pay for the existing pensioners. That money isn't yours. It gets pissed away immediately. I guarantee you, once you're old they'll say "Oh sorry there old bean, taxman took it all, not a sausage left, I barely got my own commission out of it, isn't that funny?"
    Forget being Middle Class, we get shafted and gutted like kippers. Either be poor and live off the state in social housing and on the dole (paid for by us) or be filthy rich and get tax breaks for everything you didn't squirrel away to the Bahamas by shafting your suppliers and customers and then declaring "bankruptcy".
    So, if you're honest and hardworking, you're screwed. Because if you take into account paying tax on your income, VAT on your shopping, DIRT, VAT and VRT on cars, Stamp Duty, LPT, taxing your pension, and care when you're finally clapped out, I'm willing to bet that nearly 90% of what we make gets pissed away on tax between you and tax on business. You will be taken for a ride and treated with contempt. And it's very funny, just how loud a lot of us turkeys scream for Christmas. And that the state manages to run at a loss.
    Basically, if we managed to accumulate wealth (the avergae Joe that is) we wouldn't be dependent on our dead end jobs to make ends meet and we might question the state. Therefore all our money and assets have to be stripped to keep us perpetually down, sky high tax, rent, property prices and care for the elderly ensure that this is the case. Imagine what would happen if the middle classes could accumulate enough wealth to give up the rat race? The state would lose out massively on tax, large multinationals would lose out on mindless worker drones, large pensions funds would completely dry up (not that you will ever see that money again in any case) and God knows who else would lose out on riding us. So, yes it's a rat race, it's for saps and you can't win unless you're even more crooked.

    Well said Doc, and the ones who don't want to believe this is the way things are will call you a tinfoiler. Funny that, huh?


  • #60
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Edit: should say, its contributory, I don't know if that makes a difference to the amount they get.

    Contribute PRSI all your life = 230 pw in 2015

    Non-contributory pension = 219 pw in 2015

    11 euro per week more.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Geuze wrote: »
    Tens of thousands of people live perfectly well on the State Pension.

    233 pw = 12k approx pa.

    Living on ≠ live perfectly well on


  • #62
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    smash wrote: »
    Living on ≠ live perfectly well on

    Its a subjective standard.


  • #63
    Agent Smyth
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Agent Smyth


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Its a subjective standard.

    That's it in a nutshell


  • #64
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Its a subjective standard.
    It is, but isn't retirement supposed to be about doing the things you couldn't do for the last 30/40 years?


  • #65
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    Agent Smyth wrote: »
    It depends on how you spend it, most people wont spend as much in retirement as they did in there 40s, I suspect most people could live quite well on 20k a year

    You could live quite well on 20k a year if you retired to a beach hut in Bangladesh maybe


  • #66
    Into The Blue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,358 ✭✭✭Into The Blue


    galljga1 wrote: »
    Are pension contributions tax free?
    Your pension makes up part/all your income. All income is subject to tax.

    We don't like that sort of sensible talk around here!


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    smash wrote: »
    It is, but isn't retirement supposed to be about doing the things you couldn't do for the last 30/40 years?

    Yes, and for some that centres around money and for others it doesn't.


  • #68
    Agent Smyth
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Agent Smyth


    smash wrote: »
    It is, but isn't retirement supposed to be about doing the things you couldn't do for the last 30/40 years?

    That's the image the pension companies sell you, the reality is quite different for lots of people.


  • #69
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    Deleted User wrote: »
    lolwtf.

    How did the conversation turn to this


    It's not complicated. OP alluded to taxation being comparable to being sodomised. User "system" asked him how he could compare taxation to homosexuality. I pointed out to user "system", with my post, the difference between homosexual sex and anal rape.

    Try to keep up.


  • #70
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,620 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    HensVassal wrote: »
    It's not complicated. OP alluded to taxation being comparable to being sodomised. User "system" asked him how he could compare taxation to homosexuality. I pointed out to user "system", with my post, the difference between homosexual sex and anal rape.

    Try to keep up.

    ok, that may be splitting hairs on a largely irrelevant point...


  • #71
    pavb2
    Registered Users Posts: 3,026 ✭✭✭pavb2


    Agent Smyth wrote: »
    That's the image the pension companies sell you, the reality is quite different for lots of people.

    Indeed the penny dropped for me when my pensions advisor turned up in his brand new Lexus.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Agent Smyth wrote: »
    At the moment myself and my wife live on >20k a year, that includes all living expenses, med insurance, two cars, and any social & hobby expenditure, the only thing that's not included is foreign holidays.

    What about rent or mortgage? Rent and bills would take up around 50% of your earning at 20k a year if you live in a Dublin ****hole like me.


  • #73
    Leslie91
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,017 ✭✭✭Leslie91


    As long as Bertie, Cowen, Mary, O'Donoghue, Cullen, Dempsey (jaysus I could go on and on) continue to receive their outrageous pensions before real retirement age all is good with the world move on nothing to see here.


  • #74
    CabanSail
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 9,047 CMod ✭✭✭✭CabanSail


    PARlance wrote: »
    So we should have wealth equalisation upon retirement?

    Some people have more money than others. The system.

    They should really get some professional advice. They have a small pension and buying a flat is awful use of it.


    Huh?

    It is their own money but wealthier people pay less tax than those of modest means. That is just wrong.


  • #75
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    CabanSail wrote: »
    Huh?

    It is their own money but wealthier people pay less tax than those of modest means. That is just wrong.

    You could also argue that depending on their level of wealth, they've contributed more in their life time than a few thousand "modest" people have.


  • #76
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    smash wrote: »
    It is, but isn't retirement supposed to be about doing the things you couldn't do for the last 30/40 years?

    Such as?


  • #77
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Such as?
    fecking off on a holiday without having to worry about time off work...


  • #78
    Agent Smyth
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Agent Smyth


    Deleted User wrote: »
    What about rent or mortgage? Rent and bills would take up around 50% of your earning at 20k a year if you live in a Dublin ****hole like me.

    No I'm lucky enough to be mortgage free as would most people when they reach retirement age


  • #79
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    smash wrote: »
    fecking off on a holiday without having to worry about time off work...

    I'd prefer to take a few months off between jobs every couple of years than wait till I'm 60 to get out and about.
    I happily take two months off unpaid every year when I could easily work all year round.


  • #80
    Agent Smyth
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Agent Smyth


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I'd prefer to take a few months off between jobs every couple of years than wait till I'm 60 to get out and about.
    I happily take two months off unpaid every year when I could easily work all year round.

    This for me is what it's all about, getting you work life private life balance right, so as you can enjoy life to its fullest now rather then waiting till you retire at 67 and find you cant afford the lifestyle you want or a medical condition that prevents you from enjoying the free time you have left :)


  • #81
    esforum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭esforum


    Ezra Wibberley wrote: »
    I hear ya. I do, it pains me to know it'll be taxed.

    BUT, at the same time, there are tax breaks with paying into a pension while working at your marginal rate of tax. So in effect you can contribute more to a pension scheme than it's costing you, allowing that money work for you (hopefully) for 20, 30, 40 years, whatever the case may be. That should probably offset what you're paying in tax when in receipt of your pension, right?

    presuming you dont die prior to collecting it. Lets face it, how many people die every day before they retire?
    smash wrote: »
    Not a hope in hell.

    the very generous public sector pension for Gardai is about 25 thousand, people claim its a fortune.
    Geuze wrote: »
    What are you on about?

    The generous tax reliefs on pension contributions?

    The short-term temporary levy on pension fund assets?

    The income tax payable on all income, including pension income?

    the tax relief because its in the countries interests that you have a pension, you get tax relief on a lot of things

    its not temporary for everyone and its still a smack in the face.

    yes, I am sorry I think someone who paid tax into the system for 40+ years and then ensured they were not a burden on the state in their retirement should be allowed retire in peace and enjoy their few years without continuing to pay into a system they have covered most of their lives, I do apologise.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Squall Leonhart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,794 ✭✭✭Squall Leonhart


    esforum wrote: »
    presuming you dont die prior to collecting it. Lets face it, how many people die every day before they retire?

    I'll counter this by saying, suppose you don't die young? Supposing you haven't paid into a pension, then when you reach 67, or whatever the age is, you're in good health, but the state pension turns out to be woefully inadequate at the time, or non-existant. What then? Live til 95 in poverty?

    An extraordinary amount of people DO make it to retirement age. It's foolhardy to think "I might die young, **** paying into this thing". While it may be true, it's more likely that you'll live to that age.


  • #83
    Agent Smyth
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Agent Smyth


    Squall Leonhart wrote: »
    I'll counter this by saying, suppose you don't die young? Supposing you haven't paid into a pension, then when you reach 67, or whatever the age is, you're in good health, but the state pension turns out to be woefully inadequate at the time, or non-existant. What then? Live til 95 in poverty?

    An extraordinary amount of people DO make it to retirement age. It's foolhardy to think "I might die young, **** paying into this thing". While it may be true, it's more likely that you'll live to that age.

    When I was thinking of starting a pension many years ago the one bit of advise I got was that no matter how good or bad your pension performs, when you get to your retirement you will be glad you did start one.


  • #84
    Sam Kade
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,313 ✭✭✭✭Sam Kade


    Agent Smyth wrote: »
    When I was thinking of starting a pension many years ago the one bit of advise I got was that no matter how good or bad your pension performs, when you get to your retirement you will be glad you did start one.

    If you get to retirement ;)


  • #85
    CabanSail
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 9,047 CMod ✭✭✭✭CabanSail


    smash wrote: »
    You could also argue that depending on their level of wealth, they've contributed more in their life time than a few thousand "modest" people have.

    You could argue that, but it would be irrelevant.


  • #86
    Agent Smyth
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Agent Smyth


    Sam Kade wrote: »
    If you get to retirement ;)

    That's a very good point and one of the reasons why I mostly retired in 2011
    at the tender age of 44 :D


  • #87
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    esforum wrote: »
    its not temporary for everyone and its still a smack in the face.

    The pension levy on pension fund assets is temporary, and has been abolished, thankfully.


    Levy on private pension funds
    There was a levy of 0.6% on the market value of assets which are managed in pension funds and pension plans approved under Irish tax legislation. (These include occupational pension schemes, Retirement Annuity Contracts and Personal Retirement Savings Accounts). This levy applied until the end of 2014. In 2014 an extra levy of 0.15% was introduced. This meant that the total pension levy in 2014 was 0.75% and the levy in 2015 is 0.15%. It was announced in Budget 2016 that this levy will be abolished.




    You may be thinking about the PRD, paid by the PS??


  • #88
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    CabanSail wrote: »
    You could argue that, but it would be irrelevant.

    No it wouldn't. They've earned their wealth.


  • #89
    Irish Stones
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,307 ✭✭✭Irish Stones


    esforum wrote: »
    Taxing pensions. **** me if thats not bending over the working man and then asking them to supply the vaseline.

    I work all my life, pay tax, pay into a private pension (which is now subject to a levy in some cases) and you have the audacity to continue to take money of me because I actually planned for my future? You bastards!

    Don't know about you Irish, but we Italian can move to Portugal after retirement and have our pension cheque in the whole, not a tax on it for 10 years.
    There in Portugal you can rent an apartment for about 200 euro and buy food for a much lower sum of money monthly. A low pension can worth much more over there.
    It seems that several thousands Italian pensioners have already moved there, where the climate is rather good, the culture isn't very dissimilar to ours and the food is good too.
    Any idea if Ireland has such an agreement with Portugal or some other country around?


  • #90
    Allinall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Allinall


    smash wrote: »
    If you consider the tax you pay on everything you pay for after you get your net pay then you could work it out at way above and beyond 50%.

    That's tax on spending, not earnings.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 24,714 ✭ [Deleted User]


    CabanSail wrote: »
    You could argue that, but it would be irrelevant.

    I would say its very relevant. If you earned more when you worked you paid much more tax you should therefore be entitled to a proportionally higher tax free return on retirement.


  • #92
    CabanSail
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 9,047 CMod ✭✭✭✭CabanSail


    smash wrote: »
    No it wouldn't. They've earned their wealth.


    As long as they have earned the €200k, which is the limit for the tax free lump sum why shouldn't everyone be able to take it?

    Why should the wealthy pay no tax on that whereas those less well off have to pay significant tax on the same money?


  • #93
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Allinall wrote: »
    That's tax on spending, not earnings.

    I did say after your net pay!


  • #94
    esforum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭esforum


    Squall Leonhart wrote: »
    I'll counter this by saying, suppose you don't die young? Supposing you haven't paid into a pension, then when you reach 67, or whatever the age is, you're in good health, but the state pension turns out to be woefully inadequate at the time, or non-existant. What then? Live til 95 in poverty?

    An extraordinary amount of people DO make it to retirement age. It's foolhardy to think "I might die young, **** paying into this thing". While it may be true, it's more likely that you'll live to that age.

    yeah but my point wasnt that you shouldnt pay in. and 10 grand for sitting on your arse neveing having worked, aint nothing


  • #95
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    CabanSail wrote: »
    As long as they have earned the €200k, which is the limit for the tax free lump sum why shouldn't everyone be able to take it?

    Why should the wealthy pay no tax on that whereas those less well off have to pay significant tax on the same money?

    Everyone is entitled to a tax free lump sum, as long as they've work for over 20 years, of 1.5 times their final salary.

    This salary can include non-pensionable earnings and can be averaged out over a number of years.

    There is also an option of taking 25% of your fund value as a lump sum.

    The lump sum is tax free up to €200k, anything over that is taxed at a certain rate. Anything over €500k is taxed again.

    From reading your posts you either don't seem to know the rules around retirements or you're not explaining yourself very well.

    Whomever you are dealing with should take independent financial advice from someone who can explain to them clearly what their options are with frightening them that they are a victim of some government/wealth conspiracy.


  • #96
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Kenzie Early Sneaker wrote: »
    I would say its very relevant. If you earned more when you worked you paid much more tax you should therefore be entitled to a proportionally higher tax free return on retirement.

    No. It works the other way. Tax is deferred on pensions when working.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 24,714 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    No. It works the other way. Tax is deferred on pensions when working.

    Most of your pension pot the tax is deferred but you are entitled to a tax free lump sum also from your pot calculated as the post above.

    Also while the tax is deferred you can still pay less if for instance you are earning at the higher rate of tax. You can but money away pre-tax and then when you are getting your pension you only pay tax at the lower rate up the the marginal rate on the money where as if you didn't put it in a pension you would have paid the higher rate of tax.


  • #98
    Agent Smyth
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Agent Smyth


    No mater what way you look at it, a pension is the most tax efficient way to save money


  • #99
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    HensVassal wrote: »
    You could live quite well on 20k a year if you retired to a beach hut in Bangladesh maybe

    It depends. House paid off. Savings. 20k a year could fund a pretty good lifestyle.


  • #100
    CabanSail
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 9,047 CMod ✭✭✭✭CabanSail


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Everyone is entitled to a tax free lump sum, as long as they've work for over 20 years, of 1.5 times their final salary.

    This salary can include non-pensionable earnings and can be averaged out over a number of years.

    There is also an option of taking 25% of your fund value as a lump sum.

    The lump sum is tax free up to €200k, anything over that is taxed at a certain rate. Anything over €500k is taxed again.

    From reading your posts you either don't seem to know the rules around retirements or you're not explaining yourself very well.

    Whomever you are dealing with should take independent financial advice from someone who can explain to them clearly what their options are with frightening them that they are a victim of some government/wealth conspiracy.


    We understand it fully. All I am saying is that the system is skewed very much in favour of the wealthy. One would think it was a product of a country which has been dominated by centre right political parties.


Advertisement